If someone ever says there's no barriers to female climbers, this is what I say

I work at my university’s climbing wall, and last year my female co-workers and I started a Women's Night to address issues one of my coworkers noticed, and since then I've thought a lot about barriers women face in climbing. Here are some I’ve thought about:

1. Indoor climbing is a unique sport in that beginners climb right next to experts. When you first start jogging, you’re not forced to run next to someone who runs a 5 minute mile, but yet that’s probably what it feels like when a V0 is a challenge and someone flashes a V6 next to you. I feel like women are especially prone to self-comparison like this.
2. When you first start climbing, you naturally think its all about strength. The average woman has less strength than the average man. This can be discouraging, and can also mean there’s less routes a complete beginner woman can climb than a complete beginner man, which is also discouraging.
3. When our smallish boulder is crowded as it often is, and there’s five or more climbers taking turns on a section, beginners (particularly women) don’t have the confidence to “get in there” and actually take a turn on the wall much at all - especially when you don’t have a sense for how the etiquette works, everyone else is keen to hop on too, and when you climb and probably flail, you know you have plenty of eyes on you, and you probably get embarrassed. I’ve watched new women come to the boulder and get on maybe twice before leaving, probably for good, in situations like these. Maybe this has to do with how women are socialized in our culture. 
4. So this is more of a theory than something I’ve observed. Almost every woman I know who climbs seriously has a boyfriend who also does. Due to the gender imbalance in climbing, this makes sense. But the problem is that when you’re a beginner climber, you need mentors to help teach you technique/strategy in order to improve, and of course partners. A lot of women feel most comfortable when another woman is in this role, but if all the ladies are out climbing with their boyfriends (as I’ll admit I often am, he’s for sure my most comfortable, enjoyable partner - duh!), who’s going to partner and mentor the newbies? Hopefully a kind dude or the rare available lady, but very often it’ll be a guy that’s interested in being more than just a climbing partner. To have the patience to leave your buddies and climb with someone several grades lower than you is usually motivated by something. And thus, this makes improving at climbing less accessible for women who aren’t interested in or available for flirting or romantic relationships.

Note that ALL of these are independent of men treating women negatively directly, which I think what most male climbers envision when they think of barriers to female climbers. This can obviously be an issue too, though not one I’ve experienced directly.

I’m curious what other barriers anyone else has noticed to female climbers, please add if you’d like!

Side note - to do what I can to help other women overcome these, I try to approach new women at the wall with friendliness and a lot of guidance, encouragement, and helpfulness, and encourage lots of questions and communication. Women's Night once a week where we staff only females and encourage females only has been really effective in improving the number of women who climb here, as we keep a super open, beginner-friendly, no judgement atmosphere that has shown to be just what lots of ladies need to get into climbing.

Edit: Wow this has blown up a lot more than I expected it to, especially since I was expecting comments to be input from other women sharing experiences they’ve seen or know of that have discouraged them or other from climbing - which has compromised exactly zero comments.

I guess I’m glad this has stirred the pot a little bc I’ve gotten some good food for thought and it seems other have too. But I think this is really just the beginning of the conversation- these are some of my thoughts on my experience, and I have plenty of other of thoughts on women who climb that I haven’t solidified “arguments” for that would certainly get destroyed by male MP commenters. So, maybe some other woman will be brave enough to share them. 

When I hear men say that they think there are not a lot of barriers to women climbing more, I can see so many flaws in that logic.  This helps articulate some of the reasons why it can be tougher for women to get into climbing.

I also wonder if women that break up with their boyfriend never completely find the "I climb for myself" mentality.  I think that there needs to be more all women climbing groups.  I have seen one in Ohio get a lot of instagram coverage in the Cleveland area.  It seems like that it would be really empowering for more women to climb with each other and have another's back.  Then, maybe they would feel less inclined to worry about all the other sweaty dudes in the gym.  Maybe they would have more women mentors to become those high grade climbers  without worrying about dudes all the time.  

I think mentors are better if they are not your partner.  I mean a mentor after all is someone who is going to push you to become your best.  You don't want that person to want to date and then lose that connection when things get weird. 

3 and 4 are things we can work to change. Actively include beginners in bouldering sessions and offer mentorship to people who show interest without any other intentions.

Women's climbing group near Cleveland, OH, is called ​Green Girl Gang​​​. They also have FB presence.

Scene on Radio has a series on Men that I find to be very informative and well done.

http://www.sceneonradio.org/

My gym has a bouldering group called “Women Crush Wednesdays” that has been a very positive thing from what I can tell.  It’s not like men are banned from the gym or anything, but enough women show up to create a critical mass where new female climbers feel comfortable and people can find partners/mentors.

Most of my experience with new climbers has been outdoors in an intro top-roping situation. I don't do bouldering gyms and likely the scene is different there. I've taken lots of couples and families on first time climbing trips. The women and girls often climb better than the men and boys. And men often lose interest quickly.

Many men expect their strength will carry them, they realize quickly that it does not, get discouraged and shut down. Now the men don't usually give up once tied in, especially if a beginner woman has already succeeded.  The men will grunt up the route and hope nobody notices it was difficult for them.

The men don't usually acknowledge why they lose interest. They rarely say "I'm not good at this." They often bring up the topic of other sports or just generally avoid the subject of climbing technique.  I tell them it is common for women to be better than men on a first trip - the men do not disagree but can have a hard time accepting it.

I have a number of family friends that have been introduced to climbing. None have really stuck with it, which is not surprising because very few people in general get the climbing bug. But for those that have shown interest in a follow-up trip, it has always been the mom/woman that wanted to go again.  And it seems that it's the dad/male that's reluctant.  It's not always the case that the woman wants to "get into" climbing -- often it's just because the mom sees it as a fun activity for the family. But dad is almost never into it, for whatever reason. In these cases I guess we could say that men are holding women back, but the dynamic is complicated. If there is a gender-based social order influencing climber stoke, it's not simple, and not purely one-sided.

Of course I'm making generalizations based on my observations, and there are exceptions, but I've done this enough to see a clear pattern.

One thing I don't understand is the idea that women should be encouraged to climb but men don't need to be. If a man is introduced to climbing and doesn't like it - hey, he's just not a climber. But if a woman comes to the same conclusion, some perceive that as a loss to the climbing community.

I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I see climbers, or potential climbers, as just that. There's no benefit to partitioning them into groups and gathering statistics. The important fact is that only a small percentage of people will ever take a serious interest in climbing. With the crags getting more and more crowded, that may be a good thing.

I was just commenting to my long time climbing buddy how it seems more common, on the rock and at the gym, to more see women climbing pairs - which is great!
When we started climbing in the late ‘80’, we had the benefit of classes and large groups going several times a week, throwing up top ropes of all difficulties and lots of mentoring by more experienced men and women for all us newbies, men and women (a shout out to ECP!). But for multi-pitch, 99% of the leaders were men and their girlfriends/wives became seconds. To get in any regular multi-pitch at Seneca, I could wait around for the rare time a lead was available, or learn to lead, so a limitation turned into an opportunity that I am grateful for.
I think all women events are great for building competence, confidence and comfort.
And items 1-3 strike me as something that could also impact both men and women. My 2 cents: make fun the intention, not take this or any sport too seriously, laugh and learn when you flail, watch and ask for help and realize the growth opportunity that how you approach the challenges of climbing are also likely how you approach other challenges in life.
All of that will also increase your competence, confidence and comfort.

I don’t think any of these are specific to women. Just people new to a scene/lacking self confidence.  And I think #4 is a stretch. 

Mae Rae wrote: Most of my experience with new climbers has been outdoors in an intro top-roping situation. I don't do bouldering gyms and likely the scene is different there. I've taken lots of couples and families on first time climbing trips. The women and girls often climb better than the men and boys. And men often lose interest quickly.

Many men expect their strength will carry them, they realize quickly that it does not, get discouraged and shut down. Now the men don't usually give up once tied in, especially if a beginner woman has already succeeded.  The men will grunt up the route and hope nobody notices it was difficult for them.

The men don't usually acknowledge why they lose interest. They rarely say "I'm not good at this." They often bring up the topic of other sports or just generally avoid the subject of climbing technique.  I tell them it is common for women to be better than men on a first trip - the men do not disagree but can have a hard time accepting it.

I have a number of family friends that have been introduced to climbing. None have really stuck with it, which is not surprising because very few people in general get the climbing bug. But for those that have shown interest in a follow-up trip, it has always been the mom/woman that wanted to go again.  And it seems that it's the dad/male that's reluctant.  It's not always the case that the woman wants to "get into" climbing -- often it's just because the mom sees it as a fun activity for the family. But dad is almost never into it, for whatever reason. In these cases I guess we could say that men are holding women back, but the dynamic is complicated. If there is a gender-based social order influencing climber stoke, it's not simple, and not purely one-sided.

Of course I'm making generalizations based on my observations, and there are exceptions, but I've done this enough to see a clear pattern.

One thing I don't understand is the idea that women should be encouraged to climb but men don't need to be. If a man is introduced to climbing and doesn't like it - hey, he's just not a climber. But if a woman comes to the same conclusion, some perceive that as a loss to the climbing community.

I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I see climbers, or potential climbers, as just that. There's no benefit to partitioning them into groups and gathering statistics. The important fact is that only a small percentage of people will ever take a serious interest in climbing. With the crags getting more and more crowded, that may be a good thing.

That’s really interesting, thanks for sharing.

For me, while I’m interested in everyone who’s interested in climbing take it up because climbing is awesome, I’m more invested in encouraging women because I’ve seen from my experience far less women “get into it” than men, and while there shouldn’t be anything gender-specific about the pure joy of climbing, if this were the case, there’d be 50-50 participation bc we have a 50-50 population, right? So it seems to me there’s reasons why this isn’t the case, and I’d like to see everyone who should be a climber climb.

I also don’t mean to say that any of these are unique to women (besides maybe the 4th - and there’s plenty more thinking to be done on the effects large scale from many women being followers to their husband/boyfriend). Just that from my own experience observing a lot of climbers these affect men and women but women are particularly affected because for whatever reasons more men overcome these.

The type of climbing can influence the frustration factor with beginners.  With indoor boulder climbing newbie guys can have an advantage over women because many easy boulder problems can be overcome with raw strength.  Of course relying on raw strength will ultimately be a hindrance, but it can give one some initial success that gives a boost of confidence. Newbie women often do better on outdoor slab because men naturally try to use strength where it will be counterproductive.  

The goal of a 50/50 outcome ratio has always puzzled me. Initially is sounds reasonable but it has so many assumptions built in. It's also applied arbitrarily. Should we be concerned about these ratios with every aspect of life? If it is important to balance ratios in sports and hobbies, what about far more serious matters like workplace deaths or the prison population?

If women want more women to climb, I think there's nothing wrong with them creating venues for that to happen. Women-specific events, whatever.  And it's ok to do these things for selfish reasons, like a desire to have more women partners. But I think it's kinda silly to treat this endeavor as a social justice cause. There are more important fronts in that war. Be safe, have fun.

Honestly, I think you might be over analyzing it a bit there, or maybe addressing a straw man SJ crusader that isn’t there.  The OP mentioned “barriers for women,” which implies that they were referring to people who WOULD have or WANTED to get into climbing but didn’t for a number of gender-specific reasons.  That’s not to say that there aren’t barriers for some men, only that maybe there are certain ones unique to women.  Equality of opportunity is not the same as equality of outcome; no one is saying that the split should be exactly 50/50, only that the fact that there’s a discrepancy implies that these barriers exist.

All of those apply to anyone trying to break into climbing. Women have enough actual barriers (think the wage gap) there’s no need to make this about gender. 

Ted Pinson wrote: Honestly, I think you might be over analyzing it a bit there, or maybe addressing a straw man SJ crusader that isn’t there.  The OP mentioned “barriers for women,” which implies that they were referring to people who WOULD have or WANTED to get into climbing but didn’t for a number of gender-specific reasons.  That’s not to say that there aren’t barriers for some men, only that maybe there are certain ones unique to women.  Equality of opportunity is not the same as equality of outcome; no one is saying that the split should be exactly 50/50, only that the fact that there’s a discrepancy implies that these barriers exist.

Lisa brought up the 50/50 outcome.

I think it is important to address because if we insist that the the only ethical outcome is statistical demographic balance in every aspect of life, we are going to have a lot of unnecessary tension and animosity.

Mae Rae wrote:

Lisa brought up the 50/50 outcome.

I think it is important to address because if we insist that the the only ethical outcome is statistical demographic balance in every aspect of life, we are going to have a lot of unnecessary tension and animosity.

The 50/50 outcome is not important in itself, and is not necessarily an achievable goal in every aspect of life. But understanding why the outcome isn’t 50/50 is important. 

Lisa lists a bunch of things that are barriers to women in her OP that amount to “women are less confident”, “women have a harder time working their way into queue”, “women are more sensitive to failing when lots of people are watching”...  To me, the important questions are
1)why? and 2) can these be changed?

The other things that Lisa brings up— the type of routes that are set for beginners, the number of available routes, the style, etc, the gyms can (and IMO should) change, and one way in which they can change, for example, is to actively recruit more female setters, or at least setters who have a better understanding and experience of setting for a variety of body types and moves. 

Mae Rae wrote:

Lisa brought up the 50/50 outcome.

I think it is important to address because if we insist that the the only ethical outcome is statistical demographic balance in every aspect of life, we are going to have a lot of unnecessary tension and animosity.

I agree with you, but I don’t think anyone is actually disagreeing with you or making that argument.

Jaren Watson wrote: Climbing is dangerous. I suspect that’s the major contributor to the disproportion.

I’m not suggesting there aren’t other factors.

So is gymnastics, and that's 80/20 female/male participation. 

I have the benefit of having climbing partners of both sexes. I first learned through a class at my university over 10 years ago (best use of a college credit) and it was about equally split. At that point in time I hadn't ever been to a gym or outside so I wasn't aware of the gender disparity. When I got to the gym environment, I met a lot of fantastic climbers, of both sexes who were really encouraging and mentored me. Fast forward to now and many of those partners have gone their own ways in life so my partner dance card has regrettably dried up. But of those I climbed with more often than not I have found the women to be better, more encouraging partners. Not to say the men haven't, some of the best people I have learned much from were men. But the women were more encouraging, and not in a cheerleader way, but in a positive and constructive tone (coach-like). It also helped they climbed a full grade or two higher than me, gave me a climbing ability to aspire to. I'm sure I'd me a much stronger climber if I still had those women as partners.

Jaren Watson wrote:

That’s an excellent point, and though I would argue that the gymnastics example is an outlier with respect to the broader context of dangerous activities, it’s a very interesting outlier. 

Gymnastics is quite distinct when compared to rock climbing, or, say, BASE jumping, motorcycle racing, bullfighting, rugby, etc. Feats of daring versus feats of grace.
What I hoped was implicit with my above comment, I suppose I should make explicit, namely, that men more readily engage in risky behavior. Evolution is likely the driving force, but culture seems also to play a significant role.
 I’m open to being shown otherwise if my thinking is amiss.

I think alpine skiing is another good example. High risk, presumably equal number of participants through all levels. 

I don't think that climbing automatically equates to having a similar risk profile as base jumping or bullfighting. Sure, speed climbing and alpinism -- but single pitch rock climbing is reasonably low consequence.

My opinion of course, but I would be pretty surprised if there weren't equal or greater numbers of women sport climbing than men in coming years. I think bouldering and sport climbing are much more relatable to gymnastics than base jumping.

Sort of aside the point - multi pitch and trad climbing are really interesting to me because they are basically bouldering (yeah, yeah...) but with added layers of logistics, technical problem solving and management of complex systems on the fly. Basically, women kick ass at all of these things IME, and often work much harder at them than men do, so I really do wonder if it is a generational/education thing where in 20 years you watch the next 15yo female phenom send the first .16a climb on gear (or whatever equivalent, maybe not a Baffin solo but that'd be badass) or the alternative would be that continued hesitation to engage in risky behavior.
To paraphrase - our culture treats women real wierd. I really wonder if it's mostly culture.

Edits for clarity. Anecdotally I know some badass women climbers so that could be biased. Also wanted to add that I think rugby and bullfighting are likely deeply tied to male evolutionary history, so it is somewhat unsurprising women aren't as enticed.
Something, something ... you could stretch that argument to exploration and mult-pitch climbing but my gut tells me that drive is entirely human and that the reason I question whether or not women have it is, once again, because of our sexist culture

Aaand as long as I'm tacking on edits - I do want to respectfully say that as a male with anxiety and wavering self confidence the op certainly described my personal barriers to entering climbing (and skateboarding as a child). I did learn outside, and likely wouldn't be a climber if I was introduced to the sport in a busy bouldering gym expressly because of those social barriers.

It's so important that we are understanding and encouraging of new climbers! Failure in front of people is scary, and climbing is hard! 

Em Cos wrote:

So is gymnastics, and that's 80/20 female/male participation. 

So is knitting, and that's 99/1 female/male participation.